But I will stick with Clapper. He’s proven himself to be a perfect Obama appointee, by which I mean incompetent and eminently malleable in his claims according to Obama’s political needs. Furthermore, we are speaking here of the deaths of four Americans, including an ambassador. We are talking about talking points prepared by the CIA to be given to the US Ambassador for wide dissemination on television. And the US Ambassador was appearing on TV at the order of the White House (which I imagine means the President).

As very senior people are involved on all ends of this, I doubt very much the edit job was done by a convenient subordinate. I would imagine another principal– Clapper himself — made the edits. Either way, Clapper is confirmed to have reviewed the edits, at the very least.

As I’ve been saying, these talking points are negotiated. It is not the case that the CIA just hands out talking points and the Administration accepts them without challenge. Everything Bush wanted to say about Iraq or Al Qaeda was subject to a discussion between his people and the CIA about what the CIA would be willing to disclose and also what they would be willing to sign their names to, as the official intelligence finding of the United States.

The White House wanted the terrorism angle all but written out of the report, and Clapper was the man who did the editing, and then the CIA, to its great dishonor, signed off on this lie.

9 Responses to “Sources: James Clapper’s Office Made The Controversial Edits To Susan Rice’s Talking Points”

Nan G

Someone re-wrote the CIA report(s).
And this was part of a vague “inter-agency process.”
After 9/11, the position of Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was created so our various intelligence agencies to compare data and analysis, presumably to make sure we don’t miss signs of an impending attack like September 11, 2001.
In the Obama administration, the DNI is James Clapper.

He runs no agency directly. In fact, it is generally understood that the office of the DNI generally keeps its nose out of the specific working matters of the CIA, DIA, NSA, etc. He’s a coordinator. And, he is an editor. He gathers the various intelligence reports and – as is the position’s responsibility and purpose – compares the data and presents to the President of the United States a (presumably) fuller picture of information and events.

DNI James Clapper was responsible for editing and merging information and constructing a report to the president. That’s his job. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is, by the very definition of his job description, “inter-agency process.” He serves at the pleasure of the President of the United States.

DNI Clapper was crafting a tale protecting his boss.He took the intelligence from David Petraeus and the CIA on al-Qaeda involvement in the September 11 attack in Benghazi and crafted talking points that reflected views desired or preferred by his boss, President Obama.

I thought ”Steve’s” logic was pitch-perfect.
Said so at the time.
Nice to see CBS doing a bit of digging.

Lee Fisher

All this is of course true. But the REALLY important question is barely being addressed, and beleive me the administration is happy as hell about that. While almost everyone in conservative media is focusiog on WHO the people were that attacked the Embassy, why are’nt they focusing on WHO gave the order to not send help when they were under attack? Do you think that the Seals gave a damn WHO they were fighting? Find out who the coward was who abandoned our Seals and the others ,who I’m sure just knew help was on the way.

ilovebeeswarzone

OF course OBAMA DID NOT WANT THE WORDS ALQAEDA AND TERRORIST,
HE PROVED IT by not giving the security help to the AMBASSADOR AND TOLD THE SEALS TO STAND DOWN, BECAUSE THE LIBYAN PRESIDENT ASK HIM NOT TO BRING SECURITY,
OBAMA LEANED ON THE LIBYAN SIDE , INSTEAD OF ANSWERING
THE CALL OF AMERICA’S AMBASSADOR, HE DOESN’T THINK HIS FRIENDS ARE TERRORISTS,
and he is ready to sell AMERICANS LIVES TO THEM.
he said from the start that he would take their side, here is the proof,

ilovebeeswarzone

hell OBAMA stood with the revolution of islamics countries to put down their leaders and help them instal their mindset,
the minimum he does now is publicly said that ISRAEL HAVE A RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELF,
HOW BIG IS THAT,
and he help THE OTHER TO STOP ISRAEL FROM A GROUND WAR,
HIM AND TURKEY AND EGYPT AND HAMAS AND IRAN, PRACTISING ON THE ARMAGEDON NEXT, when they finish with SYRIA SOON,
they are now foaming at the mouth just thinking of it,
wile IRAN is perfecting his ultimate bomb

The dude

Sounds like another whitewash ie…Gorelick’s wall. Twenty five years of hearings, commissions, blue ribbon panels and nothing will happen. They don’t even have to check Sandy Burglar’s pockets and socks this time.

Liberal1 (Objectivity)

Liberal1 (Objectivity)

This story only goes to show the changes were made through Clapper’s office—but still doesn’t definitively answer the questions who or why. Everybody is just guessing, based on their own biases. This kind of evidence wouldn’t stand up in court.

Lee Fisher

EVERYONE seems to be missing the point. The media keeps emphasizing the white house lying about WHO swarmed our post in Bengazi, instead of hammering the white house for not allowing a force to be sent in to defend our Seals and the Ambassador. That is what is REALLY important, does anyone really believe that the Seals were saying “who are these guys”? They were saying “they will be here to help” They did’nt think that they would be abandoned, left to die by our so called leaders. They just did’nt know what rotten, cowardly trash is in the white house.

ilovebeeswarzone

Lee Fisher
yes, and on three times, they did not send before and during and after
when the SEALS refuse the order to stand down and ask for help,
what they are doing as CLAPPER IS CONCERNED, is to get the AMERICANS
further away from the truth, the most ugly truth, which is, they denied help
on hateful foreign land, because OBAMA FOLLOW THE LIBYAN LEADER WHO DIDN’T WANT TO SEE SECURITY ARMED FROM AMERICA, AROUND THE AMERICANS
HE TOOK THE WORD OF THE LIBYAN LEADER INSTEAD OF TAKING THE WORD
OF AN AMERICAN AMBASSADOR.
THAT IS DESPICABLE, AND NEVER TO BE FORGOTTEN OR HIDDEN UNDER THEIR PILES OF LIES,
and the only question for which to find the answer, of why was is done three times?